[cfe-commits] [Patch][Review Request]Fix for PR7287

[Douglas Gregor]

On Nov 1, 2010, at 4:50 PM, Ted Kremenek wrote:

> That said, the unfortunate thing about this is that it means that all checkers that implement VisitCallExpr() will need to do this checking.  That seems really suboptimal.  It seems to me that only a few checkers will care about operator methods.

Checkers that look at the name of the function called need to be aware that not all names are simple identifiers. The seems completely reasonable to me.

	- Doug